By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Is is it possible for Valkyria Chronicles to come to the 360?

mrstickball said:
Torillian said:
Aiming does not equal shooting. That's like saying that because you can pick where you hit in real time in Disgaea that it is an Action RPG.

I can't answer your specific question because I haven't played Ogre Battle in a long time, and don't know enough about TLR to make a judgment on the similarities, but I'll talk to someone who has and get back to you.

Then he'll tell you the same thing I found out. The Last Remnant is very much like a Strategy RPG.

You deal with a lot of SRPG issues:

  • Large numbers of party members (up to 25)
  • Large numbers of enemy members (100+ in some battles)
  • Heavy emphasis on strategic combat, longer battles (some 'regular' battles can be 10-15 minutes...Bosses are up to an hour)
  • Heavily deals in class changes/unit types on a very broad base (like most SRPGs like Final Fantasy Tactics, Ogre Battle, or others)
  • *Actual* party formations ala Ogre Battle (and not the 2-tiered system every SE RPG has been)
  • Hundreds of recruitable soldiers/leaders

..And so on. TLR is definately an SRPG. The traveling is akin to a standard JRPG, but that's about it.

You don't actually have large numbers of characters though, because all you do is control groups.  This also is the reason for the number of enemies.  Since every enemy you would normally fight is divided into five it's not actually that much strategy.  Longer battles is meaningless, any JRPG can have excessively long battles (I just got through a 40 minute boss in Persona 4, doesn't mean it's an SPRG). 

 

Class changes and unit types are also prevalent in FF X-2 y'know.

 

Party formations and tons of recruitable people, If I remember correctly Suikoden had both of those. 

 

What matters is that the one thing that has always set SRPG's apart is the incorporation of movement into the battle system in one way or another.  Since TLR does not have this, it is not an SRPG, and is again more akin to Persona like turn based RPG with a buttload of characters on screen (while controlling them in groups of 5 so that it really comes down to every character your average turn based JRPG being divided into 5)



...

Around the Network

I think this SRPG debate is hilarious.



Torillian said:
mrstickball said:
Torillian said:
Aiming does not equal shooting. That's like saying that because you can pick where you hit in real time in Disgaea that it is an Action RPG.

I can't answer your specific question because I haven't played Ogre Battle in a long time, and don't know enough about TLR to make a judgment on the similarities, but I'll talk to someone who has and get back to you.

Then he'll tell you the same thing I found out. The Last Remnant is very much like a Strategy RPG.

You deal with a lot of SRPG issues:

  • Large numbers of party members (up to 25)
  • Large numbers of enemy members (100+ in some battles)
  • Heavy emphasis on strategic combat, longer battles (some 'regular' battles can be 10-15 minutes...Bosses are up to an hour)
  • Heavily deals in class changes/unit types on a very broad base (like most SRPGs like Final Fantasy Tactics, Ogre Battle, or others)
  • *Actual* party formations ala Ogre Battle (and not the 2-tiered system every SE RPG has been)
  • Hundreds of recruitable soldiers/leaders

..And so on. TLR is definately an SRPG. The traveling is akin to a standard JRPG, but that's about it.

You don't actually have large numbers of characters though, because all you do is control groups.  This also is the reason for the number of enemies.  Since every enemy you would normally fight is divided into five it's not actually that much strategy.  Longer battles is meaningless, any JRPG can have excessively long battles (I just got through a 40 minute boss in Persona 4, doesn't mean it's an SPRG). 

 

Class changes and unit types are also prevalent in FF X-2 y'know.

 

Party formations and tons of recruitable people, If I remember correctly Suikoden had both of those. 

 

What matters is that the one thing that has always set SRPG's apart is the incorporation of movement into the battle system in one way or another.  Since TLR does not have this, it is not an SRPG, and is again more akin to Persona like turn based RPG with a buttload of characters on screen (while controlling them in groups of 5 so that it really comes down to every character your average turn based JRPG being divided into 5)

Last Remnant does have this to an extent, actually. There is a simulation of battlefield position, and depending on this position, you might not be able to attack a unit you'd like since another unit will intercept you. And if a unit is across the battlefield from another, they have to spend a turn to move across the field in order to attack.

I'm not sure that I'd call it an SRPG, but it definitely has strategic elements.

 



Torillian said:
mrstickball said:
Torillian said:
Aiming does not equal shooting. That's like saying that because you can pick where you hit in real time in Disgaea that it is an Action RPG.

I can't answer your specific question because I haven't played Ogre Battle in a long time, and don't know enough about TLR to make a judgment on the similarities, but I'll talk to someone who has and get back to you.

Then he'll tell you the same thing I found out. The Last Remnant is very much like a Strategy RPG.

You deal with a lot of SRPG issues:

  • Large numbers of party members (up to 25)
  • Large numbers of enemy members (100+ in some battles)
  • Heavy emphasis on strategic combat, longer battles (some 'regular' battles can be 10-15 minutes...Bosses are up to an hour)
  • Heavily deals in class changes/unit types on a very broad base (like most SRPGs like Final Fantasy Tactics, Ogre Battle, or others)
  • *Actual* party formations ala Ogre Battle (and not the 2-tiered system every SE RPG has been)
  • Hundreds of recruitable soldiers/leaders

..And so on. TLR is definately an SRPG. The traveling is akin to a standard JRPG, but that's about it.

You don't actually have large numbers of characters though, because all you do is control groups.  This also is the reason for the number of enemies.  Since every enemy you would normally fight is divided into five it's not actually that much strategy.  Longer battles is meaningless, any JRPG can have excessively long battles (I just got through a 40 minute boss in Persona 4, doesn't mean it's an SPRG).

Class changes and unit types are also prevalent in FF X-2 y'know.

Party formations and tons of recruitable people, If I remember correctly Suikoden had both of those.

What matters is that the one thing that has always set SRPG's apart is the incorporation of movement into the battle system in one way or another.  Since TLR does not have this, it is not an SRPG, and is again more akin to Persona like turn based RPG with a buttload of characters on screen (while controlling them in groups of 5 so that it really comes down to every character your average turn based JRPG being divided into 5)

You do have a large number of characters. Each union (which has up to 5 for control) is formed with various types of units and leaders - swordsmen, herbalists, alchemists, mages, ect. You control groups, but you also choose what attacks they use via very high-level system based on Action Points - some units may use huge attacks that can damage 1 or multiple units inside a union, or even go with Area-Effect magics that can deal damage to multiple parties if they're in range, or within a line or window.

I wasn't arguing that class changes are exclusive to SRPGs. After all, Final Fantasy 2 had them...But they are a staple of the genre.

And the battles do have movement in them (you wouldn't know this if you hadn't played it). In each battle, union are placed on a big isometric field, in various places. Each union has a speed value to show if they can run quickly, and engage into a deadlock fast, or not...It plays heavily into strategy, because if your units are fast, they can intercept enemy unions, and engage them with massive bonuses.

Movement/Range also heavily affects (as mentioned) area attacks, and bombardment. You can have specific unions attack from long distances, and not engage an enemy party, if you want....And again, some of the said attacks (such as a Hex attack) can deal damage to 1, or up to 5 enemy units at a time.

Look at the picture, and notice where the unions are...It plays into the game heavily..If enemies are too far away (such as renforcing unions) they may have to march a turn or two to close in on allied unions (or vice-versa):

...Of course, this is if you want to argue that you must have hex or isometric grids for movement. In that case, VC would be excluded, to my knowledge (since it's non-linear).



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

I am arguing that you have to have direct control of a limitted amount of movement, with a turn based format for actually taking action. What you dexcribed is a very cool way to get the feel of a battlefield around you while taking out the part that would make it an SRPG, moving your characters into strategic position and then taking action.

Again, what you described sounds like a way to get the visuals of a fast paced and realistic battle, while taking out the direct control over positioning that would make it an SRPG. It is certainly a cool idea, and I can't think of another RPG that has done it before, but it is still not an SRPG.



...

Around the Network

...So you consider Ogre Battle not to be an SRPG then? It didn't have movement characteristics of units inside battles, either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogre_Battle:_The_March_of_the_Black_Queen

It's considered a Strategy game here. Maybe I'm wrong about the whole genre, and only games with movement count? Does that make Enchanted Arms a true-blue SRPG then, and take out games such as Ogre Battle?



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

blazinhead89 said:
VC Has done what it can on PS3, Its not a system seller, So sure give it to 360. We expect something in return

Not true at all! Valkyria Chronicles is what made Kasz get a PS3.

 

@ BAbab

Well, Tales of Vesperia was a big flop and the only SRPG to sell a million on a console was Final Fantasy Tactics. 11 years ago.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Mendicate Bias said:
Are you serious Crazzy? The PS3 has a massive user-base lead over the 360 in Japan, had a highly acclaimed exclusive srpg released and it still sold less than ToV, TLR and Blue Dragon. The PS3 is not the rpg seller you imagine it to be.

Oh man! Zoids: Assualt, Culdcept, Spectral Force 3, and Operation Darkness all sold less than Eternal Sonata! The 360 can't sell JRPGs!



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

outlawauron said:
Mendicate Bias said:
Are you serious Crazzy? The PS3 has a massive user-base lead over the 360 in Japan, had a highly acclaimed exclusive srpg released and it still sold less than ToV, TLR and Blue Dragon. The PS3 is not the rpg seller you imagine it to be.

Oh man! Zoids: Assualt, Culdcept, Spectral Force 3, and Operation Darkness all sold less than Eternal Sonata! The 360 can't sell JRPGs!

Well Zoids: Assault, Culdcept, Spectral Force 3 and Operation Darkness were all flops. Not just in sales but review-wise also.



xlost - So what do you consider a bad score for Culdcept Saga?

Heck, did you even play that one?



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.